Acknowledged

It does not appear from your video that the bicyclist will be identified from these images. I think the best course of action is to call the police at the time of the incident. If you had described the person in the dark pants and red hooded jacket on the bike northbound on North Winooski Avenue at North Street, the Police may have been able to stop and identify them. The police are the correct people to handle stop sign/stop light and wrong way violations.

For now the best I can do is report these facts Monday morning to the police. I did that already and I will let you know if they have any other advice other than reporting it to the police when you see a violation happening.

thank you for looking into this and passing it along. The fact of the matter is police cannot respond in time, and following a bicyclist to their destination and then calling Police is not doable either. I can't call while driving etc..We need more signs and enforcement and less involvement with loco motion on dictating the city's bike lanes. They are NOT officials elected nor appointed. This is a perennial issue that needs to be addressed and violators need fines! Thanks Code for trying.

Actually, respectfully, wrong way bicycling is a direct symptom from not having good bike lanes.

If you are so concerned about safety, why do you never post about how drivers use this bike lane to drive in?

because car owners are REQUIRED to follow laws and penalized greatly for violations. Bicyclists rarely do. There IS a bike lane going north on NORTH UNION st. Just one block up. Too lazy to follow the laws I guess. I am trying to prevent and accident. You seem bent on arguing. Have a good day.

There is a bike lane one block up on North Union, but to get to it, one must ride on Pearl Street uphill with no bike lane. This is my point.

How many drivers have you seen pulled over for driving in the bike lane on North Winooski? I've seen zero personally, and when I confront the drivers who do, I generally catch attitude.

I do appreciate that you are trying to prevent an collision by highlighting this behavior, but once again, this is an infrastructure issue, not a "too lazy" issue.

so riding illegally and dangerously is better than walking it one block up the street?...

In my opinion; no, I ride legally all the time. But clearly there are those that would rather ride against traffic than walk their bicycle out of their way.

And really, nobody would ever suggest walking their car around a lack of infrastructure. Why doesn't everyone just walk? It's not really productive to ask these kinds of questions.

Cyclists can ride legally with out the need for more cycling infrastructure. It is not about poor cycling infrastructure. It is about cyclists not being held accountable, something Miro has promised but done little. Toiletmanners, please stop using the excuse of limited bike lanes for violating the rules of the road.

"It is not about poor cycling infrastructure." Wrong Way Cyclists are absolutely a symptom of bad infrastructure. If roads make it difficult for people to get where they are going, they are going to make their own way.

"please stop using the excuse of limited bike lanes for violating the rules of the road." I'm not excusing anything. I'm offering a solution; connected infrastructure. If the infrastructure is there, then enforcement might actually work. In the meantime, drivers routinely speed, drive in the bike lanes, and run red lights, at the risk of enforcement, but it doesn't seem to stop this behavior.

Do you think more cycling infrastructure will prevent cyclists drom breaking the law? There are roads, but drivers dont always obey the rules. There is no framework to enforce cyclists, no accountability. People will not magically obey the rules of the road if given a bike lanes. Look at North Ave, still wrong way cyclists. Drivers may break the law, but there are reprocutions, accountability.

How do roads make it difficult for cyclists to get where they are going? They are allowed in the road.

Ignore that putting cying infrastructure everywhere can only be implement by taking land througj imminent domain, new bike path consideration, Burlington doesnt have the room to add cycling infrastructure everywhere. There are roads, cyclists can use them. Still think you always recommend more bile lanes, not because it will fix things, but because its what YOU want.

"Do you think more cycling infrastructure will prevent cyclists from breaking the law?" Sort of, yes. I think good infrastructure will enable some people to follow the laws that ordinarily would not.

"There are roads, but drivers dont always obey the rules." Right, agreed. This is why I'm confused as to your solution of more enforcement. It's not working for drivers. But if we used infrastructure to prevent unlawful behavior, then enforcement would probably be more manageable and effective.

"Look at North Ave, still wrong way cyclists." Yes. For one, there will always be jerks that break laws. Two, wheres does the North Avenue bike infrastructure go? In both directions, it dead ends. For people who aren't comfortable riding in the street, this is like hitting a brick wall.

"Drivers may break the law, but there are repercussions, accountability." Is there? If there are true punishments to unlawful driving behavior, then why do people still speed and run red lights?

"How do roads make it difficult for cyclists to get where they are going? They are allowed in the road." Yes, legally people on bicycles can use the road. But there are some drivers out there that don't agree and also don't have a high regard for other people's lives. Where's the enforcement for harassing other road users and using a car as a weapon?

"Ignore that putting cying infrastructure everywhere can only be implement by taking land througj imminent domain, new bike path consideration, Burlington doesnt have the room to add cycling infrastructure everywhere. There are roads, cyclists can use them. Still think you always recommend more bile lanes, not because it will fix things, but because its what YOU want."

Yes, I want reasonable bicycle infrastructure that's effective and supports car infrastructure. I'm not afraid to ride a bicycle in the street, but some other people are, and they will drive until bicycle infrastructure catches up. In the meantime, drivers that would otherwise bike are part of the traffic congestion and parking limitations in the city.

Imminent Domain? To put some stripes down in a public right-of-way? You must be thinking of the advisory question on this year's ballot. Personally, I don't think that moving the Multi-Use Path over 30 feet is an efficient use of the money needed for imminent domain. It's not reasonable.

I have to be clear; I'm not saying we should place bike lanes on every street in the city. But the bike lanes we do have should connect to each other, within reason. Burlington doesn't have room to put bike lanes everywhere, but it does have room in many places where they would be really effective.

This content is currently blocked. The content is either under review by SeeClickFix or has been confirmed by SeeClickFix for violation(s) of SeeClickFix Terms of Use (https://www.civicplus.com/terms-of-service). Content that aligns with SeeClickFix Terms of Use will be posted, and content that does not align with our Terms of Use will not be permitted for public viewing.

If the Bike Path is moved through the use of imminent domain, it will set a precedent that can affect future planning. I'm not talking about adding stripes to a public right of way.

Burlington has a fairly good reasonable bicycle infrastructure with roads that connect to other roads as well. If enforcement is non-existent now, why would it improve with more bike lanes? For people who aren't comfortable riding in the street, they should stay to the bike path. Its a personal choice.

Yes you've had issues with certain drivers. I've had issues with certain bicyclists, I CANT CALL THE POLICE and see results. If your being harassed by someone using a vehicle as a weapon, get a license plate and call the cops, the vehicle is registered. The difference, drivers are pulled over and can have points placed on their license. Police can not and do not enforce cyclists violating the rules of the road. More infrastructure will NOT change this. For me to support any more cycling infrastructure I want cyclists held accountable.

People will always break the law. As you said, If they didn't, we wouldn't need Police to enforce them. Improving cycling infrastructure will not prevent cyclists from breaking the law. As you stated "there will always be jerks." However whenever someone brings up an issue of cyclists breaking the law, you dismiss their statement, and say we need more infrastructure.

Cyclists want to be treated as another vehicle on the road, but want their own lanes and are afraid to ride on the roads? Your contradicting yourself with many of your comments. Cyclists want equal respect, Bike lanes connect to roads. Between the attitude of Localmotion and the entitlement cyclists exhibit, Im quickly changing my attitude towards supporting more cycling infrastructure.

The Multi-Use Path is not a very good commuting route for a large portion of the city. I agree anyway; let's not waste money on costly imminent domain that will hurt business.

"Fairly good reasonable bicycle infrastructure" must mean something different to you than it does to me. We can agree to disagree I guess.

"For people who aren't comfortable riding in the street, they should stay to the bike path. Its a personal choice." You are right; but they won't stick to the bike path. They will find their own way that balances safety and getting where they are going. Like going the wrong way down one way streets or riding on the sidewalk.

I think the biggest difference between your experience with bad bicyclists and my experience with bad drivers is that a bad driver can kill/injure me, whereas you will have to deal with property damage to your car. The consequences aren't the same. Do I want to hold bad bicyclists accountable; yes, absolutely. But I think a big way to lower those numbers is to build infrastructure.

Also, I did turn in a guy who was so negligent that he caused a collision, yelled at me, then drove away. I was ready to go to court and testify, but the city settled out of court with him for a slap on the wrist. As far as I know, he is still driving. If that's what enforcement is, then that's why we have scofflaws.

"However whenever someone brings up an issue of cyclists breaking the law, you dismiss their statement, and say we need more infrastructure." I thought I was being clear; I'm not dismissing anyone's statement. This SeeClickFix is highlighting a problem; I'm offering a solution.

I don't really believe I'm being inconsistent here. I will ride in the street all day long. If I act entitled to do this, well, it's because the law entitles me. Why do I think bike lanes are a good idea? Because there are people who might want to bike but don't have the confidence to ride in the street. These people drive right now. You want less traffic in the city? Get them on bikes.

As an aside here, when was the last time you rode a bicycle? It might benefit your understanding if you took a spin.

I stopped riding my bicycle when I lived in a City with NO bicycling infrastructure, it was fairly dangerous and had too many close calls. Prior to moving there I was riding a bike, was hit by a car, and didn't walk away (injured, required surgeries, still have issues, but still lucky too).

Your only inconsistent when referencing vehicles breaking the law. They have infrastructure and enforcement, but still break the law. I just don't see how that wont apply to cyclists. By your argument if they have infrastructure they wont break the law. Maybe offer solutions to hold them accountable?

I guess I just feel cyclists in Burlington don't realize how good they actually have it already and they just want more without any regulation or enforcement. Id like to see Localmotion advocate for cyclists to follow the rules of the road. May see locals change their opinion on the "entitled" cyclist. You are entitled to use the road, but some accountability would be nice. The way cyclists ride here, I'm lucky I haven't hit someone.

just to be fair, i DO ride a bicycle from my place up north street to go to the Lake Monsters games in the summer as that way I don't have to worry about parking. I ride in the road until a car approaches, then I either stop , foot on the curb, or onto the sidewalk if no pedestrians., then I continue on. NEVER does my privilege to ride encroach on others' space. I look out for me, place myself in safe areas and never depend on what another vehicles "rights" are, I protect myself first. So you entitled pedalers out there, take that as a guideline. No privilege is worth getting run over for. There is no RIGHT to be in the road for cars or bicycles. personal accountability. Live it people.

Hey ! iceu. I think you said it all. Same here. I agree.

"Your only inconsistent when referencing vehicles breaking the law. They have infrastructure and enforcement, but still break the law."

I see what you're saying here. I'm specifically talking about infrastructure that assists people with making legal and safe choices. Speed humps are a good example of infrastructure that limits speeding. Currently, automobile infrastructure is designed to flow and flow quickly, which obviously doesn't prevent speeding and red light running. Cycling infrastructure would work in a similar way.

"I guess I just feel cyclists in Burlington don't realize how good they actually have it already and they just want more without any regulation or enforcement."

I hear you. I do want enforcement, but since the police can't seem to keep with their current workload, we are going to have to try different methods to make this achievable. Local Motion has done some outreach pertaining to rules of the road, such as bicycling workshops and posting pamphlets with the laws relevant to bicycling at bicycle racks downtown.

Burlington is a great city to live in and we shouldn't take it for granted, but it has made a number of questionable decisions relating to infrastructure over the past 20 years. I grew up in a city dominated by automobiles with roads designed for speed limits of 45 miles an hour. Even they have started building bicycle lanes.

Iceu; I agree. Bicycling to the Lake Monsters game is an excellent way to avoid the parking nightmare. Imagine if more people biked or walked everywhere and enjoyed those benefits?

Also, the bike lane I'm suggesting as a solution to these wrong way cyclists down North Winooski (a bike lane on Pearl Street between Winooski and Prospect) would actually make a complete bicycle lane from the Old North End to Centennial Field.

Everyone is entitled to use a public street the way they feel is safe, as long as it's legal of course. If you choose to forfeit your Right of Way as a bicycle operator, then that's your decision and you should do what makes you comfortable.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty certain that riding a bicycle in the street is legally equivalent to being a pedestrian, in that it's a right, not a privilege. Driving is a privilege. A driver has to "prove" competency to earn a license and pay the appropriate fees. Then they are entitled to operate a vehicle on a public road. In theory, if they don't follow the laws, they lose their license. I don't believe these rules work the same way with bicycles.

I do agree with you 100% about personal accountability.

Toiletmanners,

Just an FYI riding a bicycle in the street is not the equivalent to being a pedestrian. Cyclists are required to follow the rules of the road, they are considered another vehicle on the road. Cyclists must stop at stop signs, ride on the right side of the road, etc. State Law requires bicycles to stop at stop signs, but pedestrians do not. Pedestrians cant walk into moving traffic, but they do have the right of way at crosswalks.

Absolutely; people riding bicycles must follow the rules of the road. To clarify my point: bicycles do not require licenses, and there's no legal mechanism to take away a person's legal ability to ride a bicycle for noncompliance (for better or worse). In this way, riding a bicycle is more like a right than a privilege, like walking.

I guess there will be no way to regulate these rights. It is an individual freedom to ride at 25 mph through a red light going against the flow of traffic. Im with ICEU and Gil Natural selection/Individual decisions are they only way to regulate people.

With regards to bicyclists absolved from causing anything other than property damage. I would hate to be the driver of a vehicle who injures/kills a cyclist, even if it wasn't my fault its a guilt I wouldn't want to live with. But they can only cause property damage. They cant be the catalyst to a horrific accident or situation.

"I would hate to be the driver of a vehicle who injures/kills a cyclist.."

Yes, because you seem like a caring and rational human being. But there are drivers out there who honestly believe that human life is less than scratches on their car's paint job.

"They cant be the catalyst to a horrific accident or situation."

Indeed, they can, of course. But once again, if infrastructure is there to help prevent bad bicycling, or assisting with driver's attention/vision, then maybe we can lower the risk to where the police can enforce against bad behavior.

This weekend, while crossing at the intersection of North Winooski and North Street, I had to wave off a driver who was intent on driving around me in the crosswalk to go the wrong way up N. Winooski.

This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 2872473.

If you are already receiving notifications regarding this issue,
you will now receive updates regarding issue 2872473.